October 04, 2012
Seattle Times Endorses John Koster
This week the Seattle Times endorsed Koster over Suzan DelBene for Washington's 1st Congressional District.
The Times says Koster's "views are well known and consistently applied over decades in elective office and public service" while DelBene is only known "from the campaign trail." The Times further says that "Koster understands the fragility of the economy from the Main Street level, and the anxiety and uncertainty of the small-business operator. He is equally conservative about ending overseas conflicts and cautionary about going to war without a clear mission and exit strategy."
The Times adds, "We disagree with Koster on social issues, but in Congress right now, his fiscal viewpoint and elected experience are what�s needed," which is notable given that almost everything the Democrats and DelBene are saying about Koster right now is bizarrely about abortion, while our economy and federal government's fiscal health are, to put it midly, in the toilet.
Maybe this endorsement will shock the DelBene campaign and her backers into getting serious about the issues.
Cross-posted on <pudge/*>.
Posted by pudge at October 04, 2012
11:35 PM | Email This
1. Don't hold your breath regarding that last sentence.
2. Kato, yes, I prefer breathing to not.
Yes, it is an over used expression, perhaps. Sad thing is, in this crazy State people will vote on things like abortion over the economy or the budget disaster.
They will keep doing it until it is shown not to work. So far, it works.
Sure. That's why Rossi lost in 2008, in large part. Gregoire had massively bloated our spending and created deficits as far as the eye can see, despite promising not to. Rossi had a good plan to fix it and a track record of doing it. But he's a "conservative" so he lost. People voted identity politics instead of looking at the issues.
I think 2012 will be at least somewhat different.
Love that Koster is a real guy with Mainstreet values and not elitist ones. He'll connect best with the large rural areas, as well as the equally important businesses in our district.
He's a good guy, too, and we can't have too much of that in DC. People are sick of elitist, mean and nasty leftists in DC.
6. What's interesting is to consider the recommendation of Koster - "in Congress right now, his fiscal viewpoint and elected experience are what's needed" - with the Times' endorsement of President Obama. Someone who has the opposite viewpoint of Koster. Politics trumps logic yet again!
Yet, you wrote in your response the reason (that is "In Congress"). Since the current Congress (last two years) has little as far as results to show (i.e., bills passed, especially bills of any importance) , it is wise to recommend someone who may get the job done in Congress.
I would put forth to you that in spite of the current President's actions or non-actions, Congress could have passed bills addressing the issues and then it would be up to the President to sign or veto them. The problem is, we haven't seen that occur. This Congress has been one of the least productive in modern history (last 50 years).
Hopefully, the next two years, no matter who gets elected as President, Congress will be more productive and send whoever is President more legislation to approve or veto.
I am for Koster (and Baumgartner for Senate) and hope they can at least change the tone. It is time to get rid of the current congress and senators, where we get the chance (no matter party).
8. Have there been any polls lately for this race?
9. Koster seems to have a good shot at winning, but it will be more of a stretch for Baumgartner. It would not have mattered that much if the ST had endorsed Romney in a seasick blue state - less of an impact than if they endorsed Koster.
Who was been the stumbling block with Congress - in particular, the budget? The House (of which Koster would be a member of the majority) does its job. The Democrat (that's the President's party, of which he is the de-facto head) controlled Senate is the land of obstructionism.
It seems that the Times thinks the policies of the GOP are the right policies for Congress to push and get to the Presidency. But they support a President opposed to most of those policies... I guess they either want gridlock, or they're just playing politics. I think the latter is more appropriate.
Dan, yeah, that is the most bizarre thing ... literally, the Senate has done FAR more obstructionism than the House. The Senate won't even take up a budget!
The House passed a bunch of jobs bills, the Senate won't take up a single one ... but when the Senate passes one, the House is "obstructionist" for not voting for it.
It's just insanity. This is the DC version of "stop hitting yourself! stop hitting yourself!"
"...why Rossi lost in 2008..."
It's not who votes who counts, it's who counts the votes that matters! King County Elections did its job for Gregoire back in the '08 election.
13. Pretty neat trick to try and blame Republicans, who control one half of one third of government for not getting enough done. If Democrats' idea of "getting things done" is capitulating to Democrats, they aren't going to get very far.
Objective interesting improvements in this authentic version of Windows 7 were a feature called Microsoft windows 7 Anytime Upgrade Critical, which permitted users while using the Windows 7 Starter,office 2010 key
Property Premium, and Professional editions to upgrade into a higher-end edition easily that is certainly Windows 7 Ultimate Type.In the past, upgrading Windows could be a bit of a inconvenience.You can now invest in an upgrade key online or from the state retail store.The prices these upgrade key was, certainly, making the service both thriftier and much simpler.A Windows Anytime Upgrade key code could also be called a Microsoft windows Anytime Upgrade product critical.Fortunately, regarding Windows 7,office 2010 professional
Microsoft has had back instantaneous electronic upgrading by employing Windows Anytime Upgrade.Upgrading completely to another edition of Windows 7 at this time needs the purchase of any license online, or by using manual program of a license key and this can be obtained at retail.The way should be to purchase a key as well as upgrade process will normally takes about TEN mins.
Dan & Pudge,
I would agree that the Senate has been the biggest stumbling block, but I wouldn't let the House off the hook. For example, the current Farm Bill is stalled in the House because even the GOP factions can't decide what should and shouldn't go in the Farm Bill.
The problem I see is no matter whether it is Romney or Obama as President, I don't see the House and Senate changing, particularly the Senate where even if GOP take control it will be in the 51-53 range. McConnell has set the precedent for minority party operations. Let's say Romney is elected, the House stays GOP (98% likelihood), and the Senate flips to GOP (51 to 49). Reid, playing from McConnell's playbook will do everything to make Romney a one-term president. Why wouldn't he? The precident has been set and it will take a few elections to weed out the old guard (McConnells and Reids) with new blood (like Baumgartner).
16. Reid, playing from McConnell's playbook will do everything to make Romney a one-term president
Sigh. Such ignorance.
First off, McConnell and the GOP in the Senate has supported the bills they've agreed with. You'll find no examples contradicting this.
To imply they've opposed bills they otherwise would've agreed with just to hurt Obama is a lie. To imply McConnell ever said they would is a lie. All McConnell said is that his top political priority was defeating Obama ... which makes him no different from Reid and Pelosi in the runup to 2004.
And my goodness, Reid was the top obstructionist in the Congress for the six years Bush had the House. If anything, Reid will play from Reid's own playbook.
The only real difference here is that the parties have diverged more on the issues, so there's less agreement. But the difference is, very clearly, disagreement on the issues. Unless you can point to bills being shot down by the GOP that they would otherwise agree with if not for trying to hurt Obama, you have no case.
The biggest fail of the Democrats in the Senate has been the budget - and that does NOT need a 60 vote majority (it is exempt from unending filibusters). The ONLY reason a budget has not been passed in nearly 4 years is because Harry Reid refuses to let it come out of committee - and thus cannot be voted on.
If the GOP controlled the Senate, even by 1 vote, we'd at least have votes on the budget - which is arguably the most important thing that Congress as a whole can do (setting our national budget). This is 100% the fail of the Democrats/Harry Reid, and would be absolutely changed with a GOP controlled Senate.
It wouldn't be "business as usual" as we see with the Democrats.
The biggest failure in Congress is not the Budget, in my opinion. Congress still passes spending bills and Omnibus budget bills. The government is still spending money. Not having a budget, as you call it, hasn't stopped the Senate and House from spending money. I would agree a budget would be nice, but it still is only a blueprint. The "devil is in the details", so to speak.
No, to me the bigger failure in Congress is not coming up with a Jobs Bill when clearly an additional Jobs Bill has been needed. The House tried in spirit, but in practicality, their bills wouldn't add that many jobs. The President's American Jobs bill was DOA with the GOP, so it went nowhere.
I blame both sides for this stalemate and the fact that the economy isn't growing as fast as it could. For the GOP, the blaim is with putting ideology first. For the Democrats, it is both ideology plus naivete. On the latter part, the Democrats have been practicing the art of insanity (doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results). They should recognize where the GOP was coming from and tried a different tactic, like tax-cut only stimulus that targeted small businesses. The Democrats certainly made the GOP job a lot easier by the blatant political miscalculations they made.
I don't see how Romney can change things. Maybe the Romney of the last debate (true-Romney showing, not version that was running for nomination, but more Massachusetts Romney) can get the GOP to play ball in Congress. However, the GOP in Congress may skew even more ideologically to the right and try to force Romney to follow them instead of following him. I can't get a read on Romney's toughness to stand up to Congress. That is probably a separate thread. All I can do is vote for congressman and senators who I think want to get the job done and put getting the job done above ideology. That is why I do like Koster and Baumgartner.
tc: the bigger failure in Congress is not coming up with a Jobs Bill when clearly an additional Jobs Bill has been needed
Nothing is clear about that at all.
I'm not sure about your statement at 4 that identity politics may not be different this year. Which I interpret to mean less.
I have a fair number of both liberal and conservative friends and we are honest with each other about politics. Most, if not all, of my liberal friends are voting "D". This is even after admitting that the "D's" in WA have pretty much ruined out state. There is no argument agains our trade, deficits, education, taxation, emergency and social services, floundering under their "rule". Even though conservatives have had a number of viable plans to lift WA up my "D" friends say they just don't trust voting for the other guy.
Basically, regardless of argument or mindset, they are voting party line. My Facebook friends are another indication....Mostly party line "D" voters if that is the way they lean.
My mother is a hardcare "D", but a recently retired teacher. Even though she cannot point to one policy in the "D" ticket to lift education in the state, and I can point the "D" party cutting education multiple times and siding with unions on keeping bad policy, she refuses to vote anything other than "D".
I think it will be, as I said, "at least somewhat different." HOW different? We'll have to wait and see ...
I do agree with you that "liberals" and "conservatives" will vote party line. But there's a lot of independents out there, and I see them shifting more to R this year than in the last few elections.
Yes, then I would agree.
So the House at least tried to do something - and it was blocked in the Senate. The biggest obstruction to a functioning Congress right now is Harry Reid...
24. Dan @23
You and I don't get to vote on Harry Reid. We can however decide not to send Maria back, which may make Harry Minority Leader instead of Majority Leader (depending on other races). Of course, I would also add McConnell to the list. At least Kentucky had the sense to not support McConnell backed Senator and vote in Rand Paul. I would rank McConnell along the same rating as Trent Lott, who infamously added Navy Ship building contracts back into the Defense budget so that Pascagoula's Shipyard would benefit, even though the Navy stated the ships were not needed. This diverted money that could have went to building ships that the Navy needed and more so to repair of ships the Navy definitely needed. Reid and McConnell are of the old school politicians who are more interested in pork than in what is best for the US in the future.
tc @ 18 says, "No, to me the bigger failure in Congress is not coming up with a Jobs Bill when clearly an additional Jobs Bill has been needed."
When you say "an additional jobs bill", I would ask, "in addition to what?"
A second question is what would this "jobs" bill cost and what would it be comprised of?
I am of the opinion that some strategic business tax cuts, coupled with a reversal of oppressive federal and state (over)regulation along with a massive effort to become energy independent through oil, gas and coal exploration/development and this country's job problem would take care of itself. Anyone who wants a job should have an opportunity to find work. And every able-bodied person should be forced off the unemployment and welfare rolls.
I will try to answer your questions, but I doubt they will satisfy you.
1. In addition to what?
In addition to the two stimulus bills passed in the first two years. The House Bills and the President's American Jobs Act bill was a third stimulus to put more people to work (goal anyway). Neither made it very far.
2. What would jobs bill cost?
You are right to know that there is a cost involved. Both the House bills and President's American Job Act bill did have cost, which one can look up. Austerity in this time also has a cost, which some who argue against the first two stimulus bills don't take into factor. The question should be what is the return on investment and is it better than the do-nothing scenario. Studies have shown the most effective (ROI) is not tax cuts (or your suggestion that it is all due to regulations), but it is infrastructure spending. Building/repairing/upgrading infrastructure like roads, bridges, and tracks have a positive return on investment that private businesses can use years into the future.
For me and idea jobs bill would spur the construction industry to help rebuild the Nation's crumbling infrastructure.